Analysis on operational status of the New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme：Based on the field survey in 14 counties of 6 provinces
10.3969/j.issn.1674-2982.2016.02.003
- VernacularTitle:新农合制度运行现状分析--基于6省14县的调查
- Author:
Xiaojuan ZHANG
;
Miaomiao TIAN
;
Kun ZHU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme;
Financing;
In-patient service;
Compensation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Health Policy
2016;9(2):11-16
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To Compare the operational status of the New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme( NCMS) in 14 Counties of 6 provinces. Methods:Two provinces were selected from eastern, central and western areas respec-tively and then two counties were chosen randomly from each province, but each of Jiangsu and Guangxi Provinces pro-vided 3 to reach the sample number of 14 counties. Excel 2007 was used for descriptive and comparative analysis of fund and in-patient service for NCMS. Results:The average funding standard was about 300 and 350 Yuan for 2012 and 2013. Hospitals outside county were frequently used and the ratio was over 40% in county I. Except Jiangsu and An-hui, the rate of enrollees who get compensation for inpatient service was over 10% and the actual compensation rate more than 50%, Fujian being an exception. Average hospitalization costs per time were different among counties and significantly rose in 2013. The ratio of out of pocket inpatient service expenses to the net rural household income was diverse among counties and it declines in some of them in 2013. The rate of fund for hospitals outside county was high and that of G counties was more than50%. The fund surplus rate was negative in that same year and was accumulatively ranging between 1 and 2%. Conclusions:The NCMS financing level was low and the personal financing responsibility was lighter;the enrollees didn’t contribute enough. In-patient service utilization structure was not rational in different level hospitals. The actual compensation rate for inpatient service didn’t increase a lot and the medical expenses burden didn’t alleviate apparently. The funds supervision was weak and it probably leaded to a high risk fund deficit.
